99 replies to this topic

[Xalorous]

Alondo, on 10 August 2012 - 10:37 AM, said:

I'll just have to disagree with ya.
Graphics are part of what make a game good. Of course the underlying system that the pretty pictures are laid over must be good too.
I don't miss the old days of poor graphics.
And I am saving money to get a better GPU for this game.
Probably gonna get a better CPU too.

I've been playing (arcade, console, computer) games for 30 years. Gameplay can overcome graphics. Graphics can never make a bad game fun. Graphics are not even required for a good game. Zork anyone?

Additionally, if the game does not have diverse, extensive, deep gameplay, the customers will leave before it can be added. However, if we are so busy playing the deep gameplay, we can be convinced to stay around for updates in graphics (see Eve Online).

[Xalorous]

Urban UK, on 11 August 2012 - 12:31 AM, said:

Best thing about it being online, is they can update it all the time, bring in the extra graphics features later on, the engine scales so you can always not use the features if your machine can't handle it

I am all for better gameplay, and features, but the graphics is what's going to draw in the new players



If that's all the game is at launch, as much as I love mechs, I can't see me being around for long, already getting a bit bored now

It is much less depth or gameplay than MW4. There is no immersion. It is shaping up to be more of a FPS than the immersive game I was looking for. I was really hoping for a Mercenaries style game, with a campaign to play, a story to unravel.

The battles, so far, are pretty nice. The graphics satisfy me...and the mechanics seem good, I mean, I can use missiles!!! But without a story to hook us, the customers will get bored.

[wintercold]

xChaoSx, on 10 August 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

The potential of the engine is breath taking. Wonder how much they'll be able to eventually add into MWO!!

http://www.youtube.c...d&v=JV0L4aiHFS0

While I have to agree that the tech demo looks really impressive, we still need to remind ourselves that all the effects can only be found in DX 11 .

How MWO can improve graphically , in my opinion is the amount of interactivity of the mechs with the battlefield . Examples would be say, the burning and knocking down of trees and buildings , when we actually wage a battle in a map , it would be really cool it explosion craters , burned forests , destroyed buildings etc.

No matter how many polygons a graphic engine can pump out without sacrificing frame rate , if everything looks indestructible / perstine from the hardest rock to the weakest leaf . That engine is useless.

[Dervim]

Mister Blastman, on 10 August 2012 - 10:29 AM, said:

How about lets not and instead focus on gameplay.  I don't want to be forced to fork out lots of money just to play a game.  I'd be happy if games stay where they are right now, graphically speaking, forever.

Well it won't be forever, only until the next generation of consoles will be introduced. Then we'll see a sudden boom in technology and graphics advancements, new GPUs coming out every month or two and all that crap.

[Onyx Rain]

cinco, on 10 August 2012 - 09:31 PM, said:

it's the same engine, you idiots.

Uh, that's the point. It is the same engine so why are the graphics so "Meh", Compared to the "My God!" the engine is capable of?

[Onyx Rain]

sirxazor, on 10 August 2012 - 08:25 PM, said:

if they dont add dat toad to the game I will ask for refund, no buts.

Eh, I'd rather have a turtle. Like this...
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Great_Turtle

[mekabuser]

the reason the battles are 12v12 is because even the best systems cant handle the sheer volume of information now coded into a mw game. <see mwll> Believe me, there isnt that.. much of a difference between the two . Since they have afull time team hopefully there wont be many issues like ghosting mechs and hit detection nonsense.
Not entirely sure that cryengine is the best choice because it seems as if we are going to be severely limited in the amount of mechs on the field.
I personally find it disappointing that we wont be able to even field what was possible in Mercs. 16v 16.
Its a crying shame that we wont be able to have at least 20 v 20 battles.
Half the reason for this is imo the strain all the graphical fluff puts on systems.

[Aescwulf]

The graphics are fine as it is. If you up the graphics then less people will be able to play because they would have to buy a new graphics card.

Also gameplay should ALWAYS come first you can have the best graphics in the world but without the gameplay to back it up it won't be a great game. Also PGI put their own money into this game and to be honest it looks amazing

[Keldun]

mekabuser, on 11 August 2012 - 03:48 AM, said:

the reason the battles are 12v12 is because even the best systems cant handle the sheer volume of information now coded into a mw game. <see mwll> Believe me, there isnt that.. much of a difference between the two . Since they have afull time team hopefully there wont be many issues like ghosting mechs and hit detection nonsense.
Not entirely sure that cryengine is the best choice because it seems as if we are going to be severely limited in the amount of mechs on the field.
I personally find it disappointing that we wont be able to even field what was possible in Mercs. 16v 16.
Its a crying shame that we wont be able to have at least 20 v 20 battles.
Half the reason for this is imo the strain all the graphical fluff puts on systems.

Why not? world of warplanes or world of tanks have 15vs15. wot might be slow but from the videos i have seen, wowp is more fast paced than mwo and the testers system probably handle that amount of information.

Edited by Keldun, 11 August 2012 - 04:11 AM.

[Warenwolf]

Keldun, on 11 August 2012 - 04:07 AM, said:

Why not? world of warplanes or world of tanks have 15vs15. wot might be slow but from the videos i have seen, wowp is more fast paced than mwo and the testers system probably handle that amount of information.

Different engine.

[Keldun]

Warenwolf, on 11 August 2012 - 04:23 AM, said:

Different engine.

He was talking about it mentioning the netcode (ghosting mechs and hit detection nonsense), I m just saying that in different games you can perfectly have more players with the appropriate netcode.

Edited by Keldun, 11 August 2012 - 04:30 AM.

[sirius89]

Tennex, on 10 August 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

its a FTP so it needs to run on a lot of systems

Huh?Why that?

Most people today have a good PC anyway and those that don't and still run a core2duo and a Nvidia 8800GT need to ****** upgrade and stop ******* that they can't run games with insane graphics.

Good advanced graphics options is the solution or a high res and low res client.

[sirxazor]

Onyx Rain, on 11 August 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

Eh, I'd rather have a turtle. Like this...
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Great_Turtle

Correction, if they dont add THIS turtle to the game I will ask for refund.

[Samuikaze]

Xalorous, on 11 August 2012 - 12:48 AM, said:

The battles, so far, are pretty nice. The graphics satisfy me...and the mechanics seem good, I mean, I can use missiles!!! But without a story to hook us, the customers will get bored.

I have to disagree with this, you say it is without a story? Wait a minute, is not MWO starting the story of the BT universe in 3049 and following it on a daily basis? There is plenty of story there and story that is in most parts untold [which is where we step in]. There will be no getting bored if you know anything of the clan invasion.

[Emery Radick]

Those looks great but i think gameplay should be better than graphics. Plus they look great now i see no real reason to change anything graphics wise.

[Samuikaze]

Though I hear and understand peoples requests for more graphic options, do we really want the game turning into one of those "switch off all the graphical enhancements so you can get urba frame rates and play guys!" We may as well just have old MW2 vector graphic options and do away with what these CPU's and GPU's can do these days.

Personally, I rather not be forced to switch everything off just to compete in the game. I mean that is where it will head ultimately if you are given all those choices and options. You have only got to look at the likes of Eve online, a beautiful looking game but everythings switched off if you want to be that uber killing group. Do we really want MWO to go down the same path as that?

[Onyx Rain]

Samuikaze, on 11 August 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

Though I hear and understand peoples requests for more graphic options, do we really want the game turning into one of those "switch off all the graphical enhancements so you can get urba frame rates and play guys!" We may as well just have old MW2 vector graphic options and do away with what these CPU's and GPU's can do these days.

Personally, I rather not be forced to switch everything off just to compete in the game. I mean that is where it will head ultimately if you are given all those choices and options. You have only got to look at the likes of Eve online, a beautiful looking game but everythings switched off if you want to be that uber killing group. Do we really want MWO to go down the same path as that?

I think one of the main reasons there is so much demand for that now is the lack of optimization in the game currently. People with min spec systems, or borderline, or even fairly good systems are not getting good performance. Giving us graphic options to turn off can help quite a bit till they get the game itself optimized then for many it won't be such an issue.

[Xyos212]

Crytek has some of the best artists in the business. I freaking love MWO, but I must admit their art department could do a lot better. The mech's are great, but the map design and texturing just looks very bland and not up to par with what the engine is capable of. The maps need much more detail.

[Landron]

Xyos212, on 11 August 2012 - 02:20 PM, said:

Crytek has some of the best artists in the business. I freaking love MWO, but I must admit their art department could do a lot better. The mech's are great, but the map design and texturing just looks very bland and not up to par with what the engine is capable of. The maps need much more detail.

BECAUSE THEY ARE RUNNING GRAPHICS ON LOW TILL LAUNCH. My god how many times do they need to tell us this lol. Go read up on stuff before you make a comment like "graphics are bland".

[CocoaJin]

Its amazing how great graphics can be, but how horrible the games that use them end up being. Such depth of environment, but so restricted and superficial the game and immersion.